2016
DOI: 10.1016/j.hrmr.2015.09.006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Why your stigma isn't hired: A dual-process framework of interview bias

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

5
167
2

Year Published

2016
2016
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
2

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 68 publications
(181 citation statements)
references
References 175 publications
5
167
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Yet, while aesthetic surgery may improve the well‐being of some employees, the distorting effects of the attractiveness bias constrain rational decision‐making by managers (Derous et al. ) and have long been recognised as problematic for companies. The most able employees may not be recruited or rewarded and those perceived to be less attractive may be overlooked or treated unfairly.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Yet, while aesthetic surgery may improve the well‐being of some employees, the distorting effects of the attractiveness bias constrain rational decision‐making by managers (Derous et al. ) and have long been recognised as problematic for companies. The most able employees may not be recruited or rewarded and those perceived to be less attractive may be overlooked or treated unfairly.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Unconscious bias is most likely to occur when candidates are interviewed (Derous et al. ). The use of structure throughout the interview is recommended (Kristof‐Brown, Barrick and Franke ).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Anchoring bias states that salient information is cued first and subsequently used as a basis for future decisions (Tversky & Kahneman, 1974). Scholars have studied the effects of anchoring in talent acquisition both from personality (Derous et al, 2016) and situational perspectives (Kataoka, Latham, & Whyte, 1997). Such inquiries suggest that screeners may anchor their judgements to available information (i.e., recency or primacy effect), select candidate characteristics (i.e., halo or horn effect), or judge their similarity to or differences from the candidate (i.e., similarity and contrast bias).…”
Section: Anchoringmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Another downside to transparency efforts may be information overload for both the applicant and the recruiter. Research on how recruitment messages, assessment instructions, candidate information, and the like affect cognitive load might prove valuable in considering how to balance informativeness with stress‐inducing cognitive processing demands in the applicant and the recruiter (e.g., Buijsrogge, Duyck, & Derous, ; Derous, Buijsrogge, Roulin, & Duyck, , on processing candidate information in interviews).…”
Section: From Street Credibility To Scientific Validitymentioning
confidence: 99%